8 Straight Finals Losses an NBA Record

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from 21st. Show 21st's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    The latest "I Know What You Did Last Summer" movie is an all-star cast featuring Jack Nicholson, Leonardo DiCaprio, the Kardashians, and the Los Angeles Lakers.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : And why is Red better than Phil? Oh, so you are not just comparing numbers? If that's the case, then the Lakers are easily better than the Celtics.
    Posted by MajicMVP


    THE most logical thing you have ever written!!!  Perhaps there is hope for you after all!!

    Don't agree, but it is logical!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : Not at all. 17 is numerically greater than 16, but when comparing franchises, there are a lot more than mere championships.
    Posted by MajicMVP


    And 11 is numerically greater than 9.  But when you are comparing people and coaches, a lot more than mere championships must be counted.

    Thanks again, man, for making my point!!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat


    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : And 11 is numerically greater than 9.  But when you are comparing people and coaches, a lot more than mere championships must be counted. Thanks again, man, for making my point!!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11


    And 17 is numerically more than 16. Just applying your logic, a lot more than mere championships must be counted. Good that you are making my point, instead of the other way around.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tachometrix. Show Tachometrix's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : And 17 is numerically more than 16. Just applying your logic, a lot more than mere championships must be counted. Good that you are making my point, instead of the other way around.
    Posted by MajicMVP


    Good that you are acknowledging the Celtics have 17 championships while the Lakers have 16.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : I'm bragging about how the Lakers lost 8 straight times in the Finals and it took the Lakers 25 years to finally beat the Celtics in the Finals. Counting the number times one's team failed? Loser's mentality? Ugh! How am I toasted? Lakers lose 8 straight Finals is a fact. Celtics have a 9-peat IS NOT A FACT! 


    Then you lied.

    How wasn't "failing to win a playoff series in 9 consecutive years" a fact? Go ahead, deny it.


    Special education didn't teach you that in order for you to have a 2-peat, 3-peat, 4-peat, etc., it has to be successive? Special ed didn't teach you that? Now LOSING 8 STRAIGHT IN THE FINALS, that's AWFUL, DREADFUL, PATHETIC EVEN!
    Posted by Fiercest34

    Wow, you know special education. So tell me, how wasn't the Celtics failing to win a playoff series in 9 consecutive years a fact?

    1992-93 Lost first round
    1993-94 Missed playoffs
    1994-95 Lost first round
    1995-96 Missed playoffs
    1996-97 Missed playoffs
    1997-98 Missed playoffs
    1998-99 Missed playoffs
    1999-00 Missed playoffs
    2000-01 Missed playoffs

    You mean you can't count to 9?

    And you know what a true hat-trick is? At least the Celtics achieved the true 9-peat: 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 00, 01.

    My suggestion to your rebuttal:

    "You changed the topic. You said failing to get past the 1st round, you didn't say failing to win a playoff series. You cheater, don't think you can get away with changing the context".

    Try it.


     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : The Celtics were in the NBA, specifically in the Atlantic Division. Did the Celtics stop playing in the NBA ever since they joined the NBA? WHO ARE YOU KIDDING?
    Posted by Fiercest34


    So how come they weren't in the finals when the Lakers won? Did they deliberately wimp out in order to boost the 9-3 record?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : Is that a phone number or something? You a perve? Other than a championship? Am I missing something or did the NBA put up a new category called "other than a championship"?  Kobe is playing for something called "other than a championship"? WHO ARE YOU KIDDING?
    Posted by Fiercest34


    Yes, the NBA put up a category called W-L. They have been using it for 60 years. Are you new to the game?

    Kobe is playing to win in the regular season first, then the 1st round, then the 2nd round, then the conference finals, before thinking about the championship.

    Think too far ahead, and he would lose in the 2nd round, like the Celtics did against LeChoke.

    The Celtics must be thinking about championship all the time. It's called "looking past the current oppononet". That's why the Magic, the Nets, the 76ers, the Pacers, etc. were playing the Lakers in the finals...





     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    How can the Lakers be the best in the NBA when they can't even beat FC Barcelona of the Spanish league? Spanish league is better than the NBA?
    Posted by 21st


    Simple, they are the best in the NBA by winning the NBA finals (against the Celtics).

    Your statement is as ignorant as "How can Manchester United be the best in the English Premier League when they can't even beat FC Barcelona of the Spanish League"?

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : It's really funny you're talking about wimping out when the Lakers are the #1 team in the NBA when it comes to getting swept. lol
    Posted by Tachometrix


    It's really funny you folks are bragging about the Celtics as the best when they achieved the 9-peat...


     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : Good that you are acknowledging the Celtics have 17 championships while the Lakers have 16.
    Posted by Tachometrix


    Ummm.... try to use strawman argument? That's what you need when 17 championships don't give you the best franchise in NBA history...
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : Aren't you cheating when you combine missing the playoffs and not getting past the 1st round? Stick to one category. Oh, the only way the Celtics are going to be worse than the Celtics is if they have a 9-peat, right?  Who are you kidding? lol
    Posted by Tachometrix


    Missing the playoffs and not getting past the 1st round? why can't they be combined? They are called "failing to win one playoff series". You mean you don't know?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : You're the first to mention Manchester United on this board. What's that got to do with the Celtics? FYI, the Lakers are the only NBA team with multiple championships to lose to Euro club. lol Best in the NBA finals? How can the Lakers be the best in the NBA finals when the Lakers are just one game above .500 in the finals? Who you kidding?
    Posted by Tachometrix


    I am not the first one mentioning Barcelona. What's that got to do with the NBA? Did Barcelona play in the NBA?

    How can the Lakers be the best in the NBA == Lakers be the best in the "NBA finals"?

    I know you want to confuse the NBA with NBA finals alone, but you think I'll let you forget about the Celtics' 9-peat? never mind the finals, they couldn't even sniff the 2nd round. You think that would constitute the best?

    By the way, if you think about best in the NBA == best in the NBA finals, your Celtics aren't even close. There is a 6-0 team and a 4-0 team in the finals. The Celtics are only a distant 3rd with only .809 winning pct.

    So, taking only the finals or taking overall performance (regular season plus playoffs)?

    You either finish 3rd or 2nd. Take your pick.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : When you say 9-peat that's 9 straight in one category. Missing the playoffs and not making it past the 1st round are two separate categories. Seriously dude, who you kidding?
    Posted by Tachometrix


    Two separate categories? that's why you are so proud?

    Missing the playoffs == failing to get past the 1st round
    not making past the 1st round == failing to get past the 1st round

    Missing the playoffs == failing to win a playoff series.
    not making past the 1st round == failing to win a playoff series.

    Or do you think "not making the playoffs" and "not making past the 1st round" are exclusive? thus two separate categories?

    Need more logic lessons? Just ask.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : Best franchise in NBA history is subjective. But the Celtics are the winningest because they have the most championships in the NBA.

    Not at all. Only if you define winningest as "most championship". The fact is, "most championship" is not necessarily defined as winningest.

    Winning most games - not the Celtics
    Winning most playoff games - not the Celtics
    Winning most playoff series - not the Celtics
    Highest winning percentage - not the Celtics
    Highest playoff winning percentage - not the Celtics
    Highest playoff series winning percentage - not the Celtics

    These are FACTS. Dispute them.

    See, it's your subjective opinion that winningest == most championships. Many other camps consider the Lakers the best because

    1) they don't think winningest == most championships;
    2) they don't think winningest define the best (becasue winning a championship in the bush league era != winning a championship in the big-time era; ask DoctorCO why the Steelers with 6, not the Packers with 13, rules the NFL);
    2) they also consider other factors - your performance in your non-championship years, like whether you 9-peat (failing to win a playoff series) or 8-peat (losing in the finals).

    Boy, you have to stop to be so simplistic.

    Talk about inferiority complex. lol  
    Posted by Tachometrix


    Inferiority complex is defined with the Celtic's logo, like trashing the other team's 8-peat (of losing the finals), yet trying to whitewash its own 9-peat (of failing to get past the 1st round).


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from 21st. Show 21st's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat: 0-8 in the Finals for 12 Straight Seasons

    Is this the 17th championship of the Lakers, troll?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    Sorry, Majic, even if it's Christmas and even if you believe in Santa Claus, when you wake up tomorrow, Christmas morning, the Lakers will still have 16 championships and the Celtics still have 17.
    Posted by Fiercest34


    Of course, there is more to being the best than just mere numbers, as Majic proved in my Red vs Phil argument!!  He actually made MY point!!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : And 17 is numerically more than 16. Just applying your logic, a lot more than mere championships must be counted. Good that you are making my point, instead of the other way around.
    Posted by MajicMVP


    Sorry, we began arguing on the Red vs Phil issue.  Since you agree that it's more than mere numbers, YOU have made MY point.  I was not involved in the 16 vs 17 thing - that's you and Fierce.  As far as I'm concerned, you and I are all set, and you have proven my point.  Thanks again.  Merry McChristmas!!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : Of course, there is more to being the best than just mere numbers, as Majic proved in my Red vs Phil argument!!  He actually made MY point!!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11


    See Fierce, there is more to being the best than mere numbers, as Redrust proved in the Red vs Phil argument. So he's on my side too.


     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : Sorry, we began arguing on the Red vs Phil issue.  Since you agree that it's more than mere numbers, YOU have made MY point.  I was not involved in the 16 vs 17 thing - that's you and Fierce.  As far as I'm concerned, you and I are all set, and you have proven my point.  Thanks again.  Merry McChristmas!!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11

    You mean your point is backing me up on all this 17-16 arguments against your fellow fans?

    You really should let your cohorts know about your position on numbers...

    As far as Phil vs Russ is concerned, you still lose. 11 in the big-time era beats 9 in the bush league era anytime.

    So, Phil vs Russ, you lose.

    As in 17-16, thank you for your "it's more than mere numbers".





     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 21st. Show 21st's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat: 0-8 in the Finals for 12 Straight Seasons

    Hi! My name is Majicmvp.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : You mean your point is backing me up on all this 17-16 arguments against your fellow fans? You really should let your cohorts know about your position on numbers... As far as Phil vs Russ is concerned, you still lose. 11 in the big-time era beats 9 in the bush league era anytime. So, Phil vs Russ, you lose. As in 17-16, thank you for your "it's more than mere numbers".
    Posted by MajicMVP


    NOPE, but thanks for continuing to make my point.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Where did he go?

    Just Googled "Big time NBA" - got nothing........hey, just like you.  I can leave you alone now, after two years you finally agree with me, and every time you post, you keep making my point.  Can't go by just numbers!!]]
    Thanks again, man!
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : NOPE, but thanks for continuing to make my point.
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11


    Your point still supports my point. Even though numbers don't matter, you still lose due to era.

    But you can keep thanking me for educating you.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Where did he go?

    In Response to Re: Where did he go?:
    Just Googled "Big time NBA" - got nothing........hey, just like you.  I can leave you alone now, after two years you finally agree with me, and every time you post, you keep making my point.  Can't go by just numbers!!]] Thanks again, man!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11


    You can google "golden era" and "NBA". Of course, your google skill has room for improvement.

    OF course you can keep thanking me, as if you think you had won the argument. Just using "your point" to help my argument that number isn't the be-all and end-all is time well-spent...



     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share